Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

openscad.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 191 posts

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#41

Post by dgroshev »

wlesieutre wrote: post #37
fn-mote wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it’s a wonderful tool. This post kind of upset me; it’s comparing totally different classes of program. SolidWorks is subscription based, so your $50 buys access this year and probably you won’t want to use the model again next year, right? OpenSCAD is free software, and that matters. Hopefully readers know it’s decades behind and very rough to use. Your example of “superpower modern CAD” could have been a whole…

Your $50 buys you nothing from Solidworks, expect to pay multiple thousands for that

SOLIDWORKS for Makers includes a full copy of SOLIDWORKS and costs $48/year https://www.solidworks.com/solution/3dexperience-solidworks-...

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#42

Post by ta988 »

janice1999 wrote: post #12
ta988 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is still alive yes the repo is active.

There hasn't been a release in 3 years and no news updates in 2 years until the recent GSoC announcement. Modern linux distros are still shipping a version from 2021 on a older version of Qt, unless you get a nightly unofficial release from the snap store. That's not a great sign even if there are commits happening. I used OpenSCAD a lot in college and I really hope it has a future. I'm glad to see it's getting spons…

I understand that but a project can still be active even if there are no releases. A lot of software doesn't even get published as packages in distros.

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#43

Post by KMnO4 »

fn-mote wrote: post #30
dgroshev wrote: post #13

If you find yourself doing a lot of OpenSCAD, you might want to check out what you're missing from more traditional CAD systems: A few examples of simple fillets in SOLIDWORKS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f78gblpqxHc Higher level continuity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5QN40d02cw A good example of nontrivial surfacing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cujS1icUTtg (the entire channel is a goldmine of surfacing…

Yes, it’s a wonderful tool. This post kind of upset me; it’s comparing totally different classes of program. SolidWorks is subscription based, so your $50 buys access this year and probably you won’t want to use the model again next year, right? OpenSCAD is free software, and that matters. Hopefully readers know it’s decades behind and very rough to use. Your example of “superpower modern CAD” could have been a whole…

You had me tricked into thinking Solidworks was $50/year.

I was about to impulse purchase a license and switch over from Fusion. That would be an incredibly attractive hobby license and would probably take a lot of money from Autodesk.

All I see is closer to $3000/year :(

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#44

Post by seveibar »

nanolith wrote: post #28

I've never been comfortable drawing or drafting with GUIs. This is true for "drawing" graphics, laying out boards, or building 3D models for printing or CNC. OpenSCAD has been invaluable to me. Usually, I'll hand draw what I need, then work out the equations, then build the models. No need to figure out what certain icons mean or to learn accelerator commands. I've built some fairly intricate designs with OpenSCAD. C…

You might like the PCB constraint system we're building at tscircuit for laying out boards, the biggest issue with most systems imo is that you can't cleanly specify constraints. In tscircuit you can just use a component to lay out PCB elements

https://github.com/tscircuit/cli/blob/main/example-project/s...

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#45

Post by seveibar »

randomghost1 wrote: post #9

What are people's thoughts on CAD generation with LLMs for OpenSCAD and other proprietary GUI-based softwares? I imagine soon we will also be able to "autocomplete" or "semantically edit" feature trees in SolidWorks, Fusion, etc.

The problem with most CAD tools is they don't represent "design intent" or high-level components well, and I believe this is mostly due to the language's not being sophisticated enough

e.g. a human says "these holes need to be separated by 2mm", but when we program in OpenSCAD and other CAD languages we usually specify x={-1} for one component and x={1} for the other (just an example of how design intent is being lost)

When we can represent design intent well, we'll have something that LLMs can really grab hold of and build higher level components

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#46

Post by WillAdams »

throwgfgfd25 wrote: post #27
nrp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This viewpoint resonates for me. OpenSCAD is a useful tool for hacking together 3D parts quickly, but an excellent tool for exercising the shape rotating parts of your brain.

It's also good if your aim is to visualise maths.

There is actually a book on geometry which takes advantage of this:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58059196-make

which has since become a series including:

Trigonometry: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/123127774-make

Calculus: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61739368-make

Currently working through a library using the new Python-enabled OpenPythonSCAD, and at the end of it, hope to work on a project which requires conic sections (which I'm still researching, so if anyone has any good resources on that I'd be glad of them).

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#47

Post by wiw2 »

throwgfgfd25 wrote: post #31
wiw2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I poked around with CadQuery and Build123D. The learning curve required a paradigm shifted in abstraction. That was too much. I just want OpenSCAD simplicity, but with modern programming language syntax. I ended up settling with PythonScad. I was able to hit the ground running and leverage what I already know about python within a day. It's new, but the author is extremely active and collaborative on github ( https:/…

> The learning curve required a paradigm shifted in abstraction. This is true! And I think that brute-force simplicity of OpenSCAD is the appeal. I am still ultimately a CAD greenhorn but it got me started, and I don't blame you. But I guess the point I am getting to is, that paradigm shift is where you really want to be. It's certainly where I think most competent programmers who want to really build in 3D should wa…

Thankfully I have been able to do what I want to do without learning the complexity that comes with Build123d etc.

Perhaps someday, but I havent had the need to get there thus far.

Also: Encapsulation etc was achievable with Python, which is something I already know. PythonSCAD checked all the boxes for me without the learning curve.

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#48

Post by throwgfgfd25 »

WillAdams wrote: post #46
throwgfgfd25 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also good if your aim is to visualise maths.

There is actually a book on geometry which takes advantage of this: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58059196-make which has since become a series including: Trigonometry: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/123127774-make Calculus: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61739368-make Currently working through a library using the new Python-enabled OpenPythonSCAD, and at the end of it, hope to work on a project which…

Yes - I haven't bought these yet but I do intend to, because I need to brush up on all three (well, I don't think I ever really learned calculus, to be honest).

Joan Horvath is a superhero -- I've seen a few interviews now.

I will very happily use OpenSCAD for that because it seems like a well-chosen tool for the job.

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#49

Post by kiba »

pbronez wrote: post #10

OpenSCAD has been great for simple projects. It’s very easy to get productive with if you know basic programming concepts. However, I’ve run into frustrating limitations on more complex projects. The core geometry engine is skittish. I still use OpenSCAD, but I’m diving into the OCCT ecosystem. It has a steeper learning curve, but seems to be significantly more robust. https://dev.opencascade.org/

I think if you want to do complex things in OpenSCAD, you have to use someone's library or write your own.

For example, I wrote centering code that basically work for arbitrary length, which then become a frequently used part of the codebase. Then when I faced the limitation of the centering code, I wrote more code for arbitrary subdivision of elements.

I haven't extracted the new arbitrary subdivision of elements out into a module for my library, but I will eventually.

Re: OpenSCAD: The Programmer's Solid 3D CAD Modeller

#50

Post by dgroshev »

KMnO4 wrote: post #43
fn-mote wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it’s a wonderful tool. This post kind of upset me; it’s comparing totally different classes of program. SolidWorks is subscription based, so your $50 buys access this year and probably you won’t want to use the model again next year, right? OpenSCAD is free software, and that matters. Hopefully readers know it’s decades behind and very rough to use. Your example of “superpower modern CAD” could have been a whole…

You had me tricked into thinking Solidworks was $50/year. I was about to impulse purchase a license and switch over from Fusion. That would be an incredibly attractive hobby license and would probably take a lot of money from Autodesk. All I see is closer to $3000/year :(

It is, check out the sibling reply. Dassault's web 3DEXPERIENCE stuff is weird and unnecessary, but can be abstracted away behind a desktop shortcut.
Post reply on HN